About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN 19
CNNW 8
CSPAN2 7
MSNBC 7
MSNBCW 7
CNN 6
KQED (PBS) 4
KRCB (PBS) 4
WMPT (PBS) 2
KTVU (FOX) 1
WETA 1
LANGUAGE
English 93
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 93 (some duplicates have been removed)
. they came up with instead a very, very weak answer. harry reid caved into the republicans on this, i hate to say it. sol many democrats were saying this is going to be fine because now, we all agree that you need 60. we didn't get rid of it. they can use it. they don't have to come to the floor and talk at that talk, but it's going to work. it's going to work because republicans have greedp agreed they will filibuster for stuff that's really important. when harry reid and mitch mcconnell agree this is really worth it. damn if, we said at the time this was phony, it was not going to work, it was not going to make any change. republicans were going to abuse it. they would never abide by that agreement. two weeks ago. republicans trotted it out yesterday, put a filibuster on the nomination of chuck hagel to be our next secretary of defense, and they won. you need 60 votes to get over it. and the most they could get with the democrats and four republicans was 58 votes t he lost by one vote. harry reid ended up having to vote no. that way, by voting know he
't think you can trust -- >> senate majority leader harry reid says he hopes gun legislation will come out of the judiciary committee but he was noncommittal over whether he would sign an assault weapons ban. >> would you vote for it? >> frankly, she knows, i haven't read her amendment, i didn't vote for the assault weapons last time because it didn't make sense but i'll take a look at it. >> i will bring in "washington post" columnist ruth marcus and senior staff writer for "the hill" alex bolton. good monday morning to both of you. ruth, this is the president's first big sell to the american people. what do you think he needs to say here? >> well, the president said he was going to give it everything he's got. i think what he needs to say is look, don't listen to the nra, listen to logic or listen to the nra from a number of years ago when it supported universal background checks. i think that there are three issues here in order of likelihood. one is background checks which has huge support and makes complete sense. one is limits on magazine sizes which i completely think the administra
unprecedented before. ♪ world news tonight. ♪ >> can we talk about harry reid's gift? harry reid owns what happened with this fill buster. this is all him. he had the chance. not only did he promise he would do something about it, he had the chance to do something about it on the first day of the senate session. he could have done it with a 51% vote for filibuster reform and he didn't and we paid the price for it. stephanie: i couldn't believe he used the word shocking here. senator harry reid yesterday on the senate floor. >> shocking that my republican colleagues would leave the nation without a fully empowered secretary of defense during all the things we have going on in the world, including a war. stephanie: also shocked to find out there's gambling going on in vegas. >> few leon panetta has to go to the nato summit in brussels. he's like george bailey. he's never getting out of bedford falls. i got big plans. i love her. she's a peach. >> because republicans have a punish a republican for the crime of being right about iraq. stephanie: exactly. this talking voice memo, filibuster wil
leader harry reid went to the senate floor this morning and blasted republicans for blocking a vote on chuck hagel, for the pentagon's top job. >> this isn't high school getting ready for a football game or some play that's being produced in high school. this is, we're trying to confirm somebody to run the defenses of our country. >> warner: democrats hold a 55 to 45 edge in the senate, but it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster so five republicans would have had to break ranks to make that happen. but partisan divisions were on display tuesday, as the armed services committee approved the hagel nomination on a straight party-line vote-- 14 to 11. that followed a contentious hearing in january, as hagel's former republican colleagues attacked him on several fronts, including his criticism of the u.s. troop surge in iraq. >> were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? were you correct or incorrect, yes or no? >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer on a lot >> warner: on s
they have been very silent on this issue in terms of where they are going. harry reid, look at the number of democrats up for re-election. the president has to get his own party's house in order before they can proceed to get a political victory. >> interesting. speaking of harry reid, i want to play a clip from him. he's asked if he would vote for dianne feinstein's plan. >> i didn't vote for assault weapons last time because it didn't make sense. i'll take a look at it. >> restrictions on high capacity magazines? >> i think it's something we have to look at. >> take a look or vote for? >> let's see what it is. i have been supported by the nra on occasion. i know wayne lapierre. he's been extremely pleasant with me. we have a good relationship. i am not here to demean the organization. >> if the democratic senate majority cannot give a full support, how will it pass in. >> a couple things. harry reid along with a number of democrats and republicans, and there are plenty of republican that is have been quiet on this as well. politically speaking, they are taking a step back, waiting to le
a a president to lead. all they have to do is come up with and sit down with harry reid and senate democrats and work out a plan that they can pass. bill: what about that? democratic congressman adam schiff out of california is on the appropriations committee. welcome to "america's newsroom.". what do you think about the speaker? he is putting all this on the president and democrats in the senate. time for them to step up. >> well a couple things. this is the same speaker that said he got 98% of what he wanted in the whole deal that set up the sequester. but we're getting a very mixed message. we're getting a message, the problem we want the other house to go first. or the problem we want the president to propose something. the president has proposed something. i don't think the america people really care about who's idea this originally was or who got 98% of the what. they want the economy to --. bill: sequester in my own state. that will --. bill: let me get that in a a moment. i don't think anybody is arguing that. you call this a man-made crisis. why wait until friday to sit down and tal
that harry reid and john boehner speak on a river basis. they try to speak once a week. there were conversations before recess about the possibility of all this. we don't know but perhaps there were discussions on the sidelines of the rosa parks statue unveiling yesterday. the house majority leader have been firm. the senate we'll -- we'll deal with it great otherwise, it does not look like there will be significant progress. we have to wait and see. the way it works, sometimes these conversations are ongoing. somebody is coming to the floor or a bill can be brought up and things can get moving again. we are in a wait and see mode. otherwise, we are waiting to see things go at the white house and whether lawmakers will jump in on friday or wait until next week. host: thank you for your time. ed o'keefe for the washington post. the "washington times" here is president obama and speaker boehner. never let it be said that president obama has failed to spend time with the begin leaders in seeking an alternative to budget cuts that will hit most federal departments on friday. on wednesd
are in the majority, it's a little bit of a greater responsibility. harry reid has to make the decision whether or not to bring these bills to the floor. there are marginal members in his caucus that might not want to take these issues up. he is responsible for them in some sense. i do believe the mayor is very much involved in this issue. we've been spending a lot of time lobbying members of congress, members of the senate on both republicans and democrats. i do believe that the senate is going to take these issues up. i do believe harry reid is going to bring comprehensive gun bill to the floor. maybe in different pieces. it may be one package. that will be his decision. i do believe something is going to pass in a bipartisan way out of the senate. you saw politico reporting there was a bipartisan group, republicans and democrats from rural and urban states who are working on a comprehensive package on a background checks. i thinkure going to see something get through the senate, and then i think you will have house republicans -- not the majority of them. some number. 20, 30, 40. who will be
over hagel and hold a vote on his confirmation. that left harry reid with just 59 of the 60 votes needed to move on to confirmation marking the first ever successful filibuster of a cabinet nominee. because of the coming senate recess, the next chance to confirm hagel will be the last week of february. in the meantime, republicans continued to find new reasons to justify they are obstruction. senator john mccain's latest gripe is personal. >> there's a lot of ill will towards senator hagel because when he was republican, he attacked president bush mercilessly. at one point said he was the worst president since herbert hoover, said that the surge was the worst blunder since the vietnam war, which is nonsense. and was very amti his own party and his own people. people don't forget that. >> people also don't forget that years after hagel's republican herecy, john mccane said this of the man in 2006. i would be honored to have chuck with me in any capacity. he'd make a great secretary of state. people have also not forgotten that this filibuster has nothing to do with chuck hagel and
of trying to protect mr. menendez, a new jersey democrat, the senate majority leader harry reid needs to remove his gavel pending credible resolution by the senate ethics committee of the swirling accusations of misconduct. is senator menendez in -- in trouble or at least in danger of temporarily losing? he just became the chair of this committee? >> i had a chance to ask harry reid about this at a news conference a couple of weeks ago, and senator reid is giving no indication whatsoever that he is going to take the gavel away, and senator menendez is right about some of the allegations, some of the others that popped up in the conservative news side, the daily caller, no evidence to correspond roborate. the political -- >> almost two years late. >> and did not put them on his disclosure form is a problem for him. >> two weeks ago is one thing. now -- i mean "the new york times" calling for a democrat to remove a democrat from a committee is fairly noteworthy. >> let's say new jersey doesn't exactly have the best record when it comes to ethics in government. what "the new york times"
majority leader harry reid had to switch his vote to know to bring the vote back up again after the senate comes back from recess. you have a lot of republican senators who said as recently as last week that they did not want to see the choice filibuster. even if they wanted to vote no, he at least deserved an uptown vote to be approved. there was no precedent -- precedent to filibuster president's choice like this. the republicans decided they wanted to try to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on the issues like the terrorist attack on benghazi in september. they submitted to passing hagel when they come back. it way you're looking at, is delaying the inevitable. chuck hagel will be confirmed as defense secretary. he is just going to get to wait 11 days. to me, it seems like you should confirm him, because you're going to confirm him anyway. it is just another delay in what the senate is trying to do. harry reid set a new vote for tuesday, in 11 days. what do republicans want to see in the meantime? guest: they say they would like answers again from t
seems to be signaling that they're not going to fight hard. >> a win right now given that harry reid, the democratic reid democratic leader in the senate is not going along. a vote would be a political victory in a town that doesn't want to do this. the president is being pragmatic and he's not going as far as progressives would like, but if you can get the votes it's more progress than people think he can get right now. >> john: and in fairness to the president, what toes mean that we're going to win an assaults weapon. the president will win even by losing. harry reid almost lost his job to someone wearing a tinfoil hat hat. so i think that harry reid is going to let this die but that's how the president wins. if the president fights a battle that he knows he's doomed to fail god for bid there is a massacre or the next ten massacres he can point his finger right to the people who killed this bill and say you own this. that would be a political win for this president at a bloody cost. >> cenk: your analysis is right. but if he wanted a legislative and policy victory, of course, wha
't need the tax loopholes to avoid laying off workers. >> claiming they should get harry reid to pass one of two house bills to block forced cuts. >> so for 16 months the president is travelling all over the country holding rallies instead of sitting down with senate leaders in order to try to forge an agreement over there in order to move the bill. >> we moved the bill twice. we should not move a third bill before the senate gets off their ass to begin to do something. >> reporter: the president put pressure on boehner to bring the local republican congressman aboard air force one where congressman told reporters in addition to spending cut he favors raising revenues through tax reform. >> a republican with me today. it's not always healthy for a republican but he is doing it because he knows it's important to you. he asked them to continue closing the tax loopholes instead of letting the tax cut go through. >> but boehner got air cover from mitch mcconnell who blasted the president's approach. >> he refused to offer a reasonable alternative and he threatened to veto other proposals aime
and brennan. harry reid said he's not going to recognize the hold. i think it has to be worked out behind closed doors on capitol hill. my understanding is they're hoping for a hagel vote tomorrow. i know brennan has the votes on the floor to win. it is a question of when it comes up for a vote. >> bill: senator feinstein announcing yesterday or this morning that she is scheduling a vote on john brennan in the senate intelligence committee but not until they come back. they're out next week. for whatever reason, right? valentine's day. i don't know. that's presidents' day week, of course. the week after that, when they come back that she will -- she'll schedule a vote. and then tomorrow, the president is going to -- >> chicago. >> bill: and then to florida too, i believe. >> he's taking a little presidents' day get away in florida over the weekend. before then, he's going to chicago. the topic there is what he calls the ladders the middle class the various programs to help get people jobs and better-paying jobs but i think he will also make a big pitch for his gun violence package in chic
. senate majority leader harry reid cuttings off debate, calling for lawmakers to make a decision. now republicans are threatening to block that vote saying they have some unanswered questions. a few of them spoke with our mike emanuel, chief congressional correspondent. first start off with what harry reid, the top democrat in the senate is saying about all this. this morning he was quite emotional about what is going on. till us about that. >> reporter: jenna, that's right. harry reid has 55 democrats in the senate who would vote to move forward with the chuck hagel nomination, confirmation process. the bottom line though he needs 60. so he needs five republicans to come along to get past that procedural hurdle. he doesn't have those five. so harry reid is frustrated. >> mr. president, in less than two hours our country will be without a secretary of defense at a time when we have a war going on in afghanistan, and about 70,000 troops there. we have a nuclear weapon was detonated in north korea. >> reporter: a nuclear test was done in north korea and 66,000 troops in afghanistan but
ought to stop calling it universal check, it's the check on law abiding people. >> reporter: harry reid says he supports the second amendment but he is not going on to let the nra getting in his way. >> just because they resist it doesn't mean we can't do things. we have a lot of special interest groups complain about things, we'll listen to them and make the right decision. >> he says the senate might soon debate on an assault weapons ban something that gabrielle giffords's husband argued for today. >> i spent 25 years in the military. i know the value of having an assault weapon and i think they are way too readily available. in time we will be able to address those issues. >> nra said enforcing existing laws would reduce gun violence and so would rounding up gangs in places like chicago. >> gregg: peter, thanks. >> heather: new information now on a charter bus crash in boston that left 35 people injured and one critically. the vehicle carrying high schoolers and chaperones it slammed into an overpass. the driver of the bus ignored road clearance warning signs. passengers say the impa
to reduce spending. we couldn't come to an agreement on that. so jack lew came to harry reid and said, here's our suggestion. do a sequestration. harry reid rejected it initially. jack lex said, what if we do half of it in defense spending? so an automatic across-the-board cut if we can't find a way to reduce spending in other ways we'll do an across-the-board cut with half of it in defense and the other half of it from other parts of the budget. harry reid agreed with jack le w, the president's chief of staff, so then it came to the senate and went to the house where we begrudgingly agreed. we didn't want to see this. i don't think the white house wanted to see sequestration as well. but this plan that was put in place, the house, the senate and the white house all agreed to was to find some way to reduce spending by $1.2 trillion in long-term spending. the first option was the select committee, the supercommittee, as it was called. it obviously failed in its task. shortly after that, the house of representatives said that the select committee has failed in this task. we cannot have seques
." do you remember when the top democrat in the senate, harry reid, declared just a few weeks ago the democrats would not change the rules in the senate? remember that? wouldn't change the rules to stop senate republicans from abusing the process there. harry reid decided he would just instead make a handshake deal with the republicans' top senator, mitch mcconnell. he said he was satisfied with the republicans just agreeing to be more reasonable on issues like this. remember? they wouldn't change the filibuster rules. they would just agree as gentlemen that the republicans would curtail the excesses of filibustering everything and effectively ruling from the minority. democrats decided to not change the rules on the filibuster and just make that agreement with the republicans instead. they said, you know, at a minimum this will at least improve the confirmation process for the administration's nominees. how is that working out now? just a couple of weeks later. how's that gentleman's agreement going? now that we've just had a filibuster of a cabinet nominee for the first time in
are the prospective candidates. there was a reason why todd akin won the primary. he won because harry reid went in and spent $2 million attacking him as a conservative during the republican primary. he said himself he has never voted for a tax increase. always been prolife. even supported a balanced budget amendment too conservative for missouri. the object was help nominate the weakest republican candidate possible to have is a chance. >> you are going to set your isself up as a bureau vetting the candidates. i mean -- >> no, no, no. >> the whole theory of republicanism is to let the local state or district decide. >> i think rand paul had it right. everybody has a chance. we believe in markets. let people do go in and partis it pate. the more people who participate the better off we are. the more we examine the quality of the candidates from top to bottom the more likely we end up with fewer kristine o'donnells and more rand pauls. >> chris: what do you make of the republican party decision to block temporarily but to block the nomination of a defense secretary for the first time in our histo
did because harry reid spent $2 million attacking him as a conservative during the republican primary. he said he never voted for a tax increase and always pro-life and supported a balanced budget amendment, and the object was help nominate the weakest republican candidate possible, so they'd have a chance -- >> but you set yourself up as a politbureau and the theory on republicanism is to lit the local state -- >> rand paul had a right and everybody has a chance in markets and let people go in and participate, the opposite of politbureau and the more who participate the better off we are and the more we examine the quality of the candidates the more likely we have fewer christine o'donnell's and more ra rand paul joos what do you think of the republican party's decision, temporarily, to block the nomination of the defense secretary for the first time in our history. >> why wouldn't they? in the end he's probably going to be confirmed, but in the meantime this is an opportunity -- the president thought in nominating chuck hagel he'd put him out there and rub republicans' noses in it a
: senate majority leader harry reid shot back. >> i think he should understand who is sitting on their pose tear i don't remember. we're doing our here to pass something. and the reason he's not bringing up something over there is because he can't pass it. he can't get his caucus to agree on anything. >> ifill: but republican senator roy blunt of missouri said democrats have to face facts. >> the spending cuts are going to happen. and the option now for the president is, do you want to work for a different way for these same savings to be achieved? and that's very do-able. >> ifill: friday is not the last deadline. another one looms in late march when government funding runs out. for more on whether political paralysis in washington is spilling over onto the economy, we turn to nariman behravesh, chief economist for i.h.s., a research and forecasting firm. we have heard in the last couple of days, weeks, surveys, polls that show that a lot of americans to the extent they're following this story do think there's a problem here with this so-called sequester but they don't necessarily think it
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 93 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)